Vilarrubias: "PP and PSOE have ceded the linguistic monopoly to nationalisms" The linguist Mercè Vilarrubias, who has just published 'Por una ley de lenguas', considers "unheard of in Europe" that Castilian, the majority language in Catalonia, has no right in this community

Mercè Vilarrubias en Crónica Global / LENA PRIETO

María Jesús Cañizares @MJesusCanizares

13.03.2019 00:00 h.
 

Merçè Vilarrubias with his book 'Por una ley de lenguas' 

To build a multilingual state. This is the objective of the law of languages in which Mercè Vilarrubias, Professor of English, works since 2014. She denounces that, during four decades of democracy, the successive Spanish governments have left in the hands of the nationalists the monopoly of the debate on the language "for partisan interest".

Vilarrubias has just published Por una ley de lenguas. Convivencia en el plurilinguismo (Deusto), where she proposes a roadmap to create a rule that obliges the State to be an actor in the defense of Catalan, Basque and Galician throughout Spain, but also the protection of the rights of Spanish speakers in Catalonia.

-Question. After forty years of democracy, how is it possible that there is no language law?

-Answer. There has not been a willingness to do it. We started with article 3 of the Constitution that supposed a qualitative change, because it recognized all languages as Spanish, decreed the official character of Basque, Galician and Catalan if their statutes recognized it, as a wealth of all that should be promoted. From here, the development of article 3 is left in the hands of the bilingual autonomous communities. The different nationalist autonomous governments begin to develop linguistic normalization according to their interests. And the different governments of the State see this development with concern, but it is thought that it is a question of autonomy and any intervention from the State would be interpreted as wanting to interfere. The years passed and the concept of one's own language emerged, monolingualism, and with silence on the part of the state governments, which have been trailing behind linguistic nationalism. They have not been able to develop a law for the entire country that seeks the common good. They have not known how to do it.

- Haven’t they known, or PP and PSOE have used this issue in their strategy of pacts?

-Exactly, it was the time when all this was agreed with Pujol and with Basque nationalism. The national parties allowed to do because it suited them. Partisan interests have taken precedence over making a good diagnosis. We are where we are because there has not been an understanding that the State should act intelligently. When governing the PP, with Aznar who spoke Catalan in privacy, the second law of linguistic normalization was approved in 1998. And they did not say anything because they had their interests. And the PSOE has always given reason to the nationalists and has supported its monolingual policy. We are seeing it now in the Balearic Islands, where the socialists govern with MES and Catalonia's linguistic policy program is being imposed.

-What was the point of no return? The law of linguistic policy or the Statute?

-Overall, based on the statutes renewed in Catalonia, the Balearic Islands and the Valencian Community. They deepened in the term own language, increasingly more important and with more prerogatives to the detriment of Castilian. There is a qualitative leap. Catalan and Spanish are official languages, but as their own language, Catalan becomes the language of preferential use in education, culture or administration. This concept is not in the Constitution. We should ask ourselves how the nationalists have been able to develop this program so easily. There has been something on the part of the State, which left the whole legal regime in the hands of the statutes, instead of developing Article 3 of the Constitution through a language law.

-In this area the only progress has been thanks to families of students who have fought before the courts, private associations.

-There is no regulation that regulates linguistic rights. The Constitution does not speak of linguistic rights and this was normal in 1978, given the time we were coming from. Recognizing the Spanish languages as official and as wealth of the whole country, this was something incomprehensible. In 2014 I had already written my book Sumar y no restar and saw that this topic was like a wall that could not be reasoned about because the basis of nationalism is language. When the pro-independence followers say that the Catalans are different they are basing it on the language and they will never leave it. Artur Mas said it, it's a red line. For that reason, several people thought that the issue had to be approached in another way. In that year I met Juan Claudio de Ramón (who writes the preface of the book of Vilarrubias), who was in the Spanish Embassy in Ottawa (Canada), where he studied federal bilingualism. We started talking and studying this position. There are differences, but there was a rupturist nationalism of Quebec that defended its French-speaking condition against the strength of English. It was then, with Trudeau as prime minister, that French was declared the official language of all Canadians, thus absorbing that sentimental dimension of Quebecois nationalists. We thought it was a very interesting and intelligent movement. We thought about the possibility of applying the same in Spain. The first formulations were to formalize Catalan, Galician and Basque according to the Canadian model.


- What does that law of languages imply?

-It aims to try to alleviate the problems we have had during these 40 years. On the one hand, the State has not assumed the plurilingualism of the country, it has not understood it. The State must be a linguistic actor, it must be active in the promotion of these languages. He has done things, but he has not been able to explain it. The law of languages is a road map to make better use of these languages in official institutions. On the other hand, linguistic rights, which have never been discussed, are addressed, a key instrument in the protection of diversity. We try to solve a situation that in the case of Catalonia is unprecedented in Europe, as a community that has an official language and is a majority language, as Spanish, has no right whatsoever. Two objectives, therefore: construction of a multilingual State and linguistic rights for all citizens.

- How much would it cost to apply that law of languages?

-In the book I explain the cost, because a law must have an economic memory. In Canada they spend 24,000 million euros per year because French was declared official language next to English and that has a number of prerogatives. But in Spain we have made a calculation and the start-up investment would be 2,300 million euros. It seems to us very little within the budget of a country and for the effects that a proposal like this would have. In Canada, they talk about investment, not spending, in languages. The investment in signs in the Museo del Prado in the four languages, for example, would only be done once. And in other cases, like saying hello in all four languages, it's free. Several Departments of the Government already have their website in those languages and Renfe advertising also.

-The pro-independence prisoners invoked their right to use their mother tongue in the 1-O trial.

-I thought it was very interesting that they invoked  the mother tongue and the linguistic rights in the trial of the Supreme Court, which is a court for all. With a language law, these defendants could have had simultaneous translation if they wanted to. Catalan speakers have their rights recognized in Catalonia, but not at the state level. The law we propose speaks of the linguistic rights of all. Just as Spanish speakers should have the right in Catalonia to use their language in administrations, receive education or accessing grants to create a means of communication in Spanish. Why not?

-The use of euphemisms as "own language", "habitual" or "preferred" has been deliberate, precisely to deny the right of Spanish speakers?

-The mother tongue is recognized in numerous international conventions, it implies rights. The nationalists have never been interested. They invoked it when the teaching was all in Spanish. One of the arguments for teaching in Catalan was that children were better educated in their mother tongue. But once the idea of an immersion for everyone is launched, the concept of mother tongue no longer interested. Once I spoke with the Síndic de Greuges, Rafael Ribó, on this subject and he became very aggressive about the fact that there was no right to the mother tongue. I speak of mother tongue and language of preference, because people must be free to choose. But they are not interested in that debate.


-To the point that instructions are given for children to play in Catalan in the playground...

-The inmersion is based on an obligation. In the classroom, the teacher speaks in Catalan and the majority obeys because there is no other way out. But once you go out into the yard or onto the street, everyone speaks as they want. People tend to speak in their mother tongue and that cannot be controlled. That's where come out initiatives like Al pati, en Català to reinforce and halfway to force. We know that the obligation has limits and immersion works in Catalan-speaking areas, but in the more bilingual areas there is a separation between what the school imposes and what is spoken on the street. There is a shock there. The objective is the identification with Catalan by all and adding the nationalist backpack, because the language is devoid of ideology.

-The nationalists say that Castilian is a language of colonization...

-They add those bonuses based on what interests them. At this moment, what we have to do is not discuss with them but make an alternative discourse better than theirs. It is much better, ethically and democratically, to appeal to the discourse of diversity in terms of respect for individual liberties and equality. These are the values of the current liberal democracies. When I was writing the book I had to stop because I thought there are no politicians to do this. You have to be realistic and assume that it will take many years to develop something like that. There is no need to be in a hurry, but social changes, of perception, take time.

-We have gone from nationalism to a 'procés' in which the positions are increasingly bitter, it seems impossible to reach an agreement.

- You can talk with the nationalists, of course. But the approach is not that they give the go-ahead, because they have always had a monopoly on the language, they are the only representatives and managers. And this is not the case. The four national parties (PP, PSOE, Ciudadanos and Podemos) should begin to forge minimum consensus, to be aware that it should be a state issue. The first action should be the constitution of a state commission of linguistic experts which would collect the feelings of the citizens and of the different sectors, also from the nationalists. And after two years of work, make a white paper on how should be that law of languages to be approved by Congress.

-The leader of the PP, Pablo Casado, has proposed a law of languages...

-It has nothing to do with our proposal; it was said that way, suddenly, and never heard again. And it is also unconstitutional because Catalan would practically cease to exist, it would be optional. It is curious that the PP does not have advisers, that it launches proposals that are nothing and, when it governs, does nothing.

- Who is the book for?

-We must be realistic. The ideas begin in civil society and are gaining consensus. We will talk to the political parties, but this will take time. The Canadian federalists told us that this will take time. The plurality in Spain will not change, so we must recognize mistakes, look to the future and improve coexistence. Our proposal does not intend to blur the common language, Castilian. The engine has been the exclusion of Castilian in Catalonia, which is labeled a fascist language, of settlers and criminals. But I would like to explain that denying the promotion of the linguistic rights of Catalans, Basques and Galicians in State institutions does not help in the defense of linguistic plurality. And it plays in favor of the nationalists and the trenches. Castilian is the majority language and works as a lingua franca. But when we speak of a common language from a sentimental point of view, we must accept that there are people who identify themselves more with Catalan, Basque or Galician. And they are languages that have expanded a lot, which are the mother tongue of many people, and that is not an offense to Spanish, but a choice of these citizens.

https://cronicaglobal.elespanol.com/politica/vilarrubias-pp-psoe-monopolio-lingueistico-nacionalismos_229065_102.html